<p>I think it’s a pretty accurate list</p>
<p>Not accurate at all, just one man’s subjective opinion.</p>
<p>Also NYU’s acceptance rate this year was 22% altogether. CAS is about 20% while Stern and Tisch are around 12%. Gallatin, and Steinhardt are closer to 30%, however this skews the admissions standards at NYU, and makes people think it is considerably easier to get into NYU than let’s say BC, which is a long ways from NYU in EVERY area.</p>
<p>hey brah, how do you, like, determine academic quality? </p>
<p>Oh btw, I have an IQ of 177. Suck it!</p>
<p>Well, he used actual numbers, so I fail tosee how this is a ‘completely subjective, arrogant one-man list’… The thread title on the other hand…</p>
<p>BTW. Thanks for the work you probably put into this…</p>
<p>^Do we truly know that he used actual (accurate) numbers? He didn’t state where he found the data that he used. For all we know he grabbed them out of thin air.</p>
<p>He really should learn how to use capitalization. 
I, with an IQ far lower than his supposed 174, know that some of the words he capitalized are not proper nouns. Bet y’all do, too!</p>
<p>Yeah. Proposing your own incredibly high supposed IQ in a username is blatantly ridiculous…even for CC.</p>
<p>neethus: plasma99 is right. You don’t know anything about NYU, do you? There are 14 schools, not just CAS and Stern.</p>
<p>TheAJay: Where have you heard “bad things” about NYU CAS? The cesspool that is CC?</p>
<p>Collegeboard’s stats are often wrong and/or outdated. I’ve found that what they have listed is a year delayed. I.e., the 32% you see is from Fall 2007. Here’s what NYU’s admissions department says.</p>
<p>[NYU</a> > Undergraduate Admissions > Explore NYU > Fast Facts](<a href=“Undergraduate Admissions”>Undergraduate Admissions)</p>
<p>Most significantly, “Percent offered admission: 25.3%”</p>
<p>To break it down, CAS’s acceptance rate: 24%. Stern’s?: 21%. Three percent difference. And according to some of you people, getting into CAS is a joke while Stern’s like getting into an Ivy? C’mon. If anything, some of the other schools (Tisch and Steinhardt most likely) are what “skew” with the data, as Steinhardt is the least selective, and Tisch is all based on your portfolio or auditions. If it were just for CAS and Stern, the SAT 25-75 ranges and acceptance rates would probably be on par with or just below the Ivy caliber schools.</p>
<p>I agree that WUSTL is highly underrated and probably offers a better undergraduate education than NYU. And it is definitely more selective. But Rice is debatable and BC is on par with NYU at best. And I’m trying to be as unbiased as possible here. </p>
<p>Acceptance rates and SAT ranges are only a small part of the picture…</p>
<p><em>rolls eyes at list, methods… and OP’s username</em> </p>
<p>Things like this remind me why I hate rankings. What makes one person or one group qualified to rank colleges, and why should we live by, or even put a lot of stock in, these rankings? </p>
<p>Short answer: We shouldn’t. Even making them is a waste of time.</p>
<p>Excuse me - that percent you’re quoting is for ALL of NYU’s undergraduate - composite, compiled, whatever. It’s not for CAS. That means it’s counting the extremely competitive schools such as Tisch and Stern. </p>
<p>There aren’t 14 UNDERGRADUATE schools. There’s 10, as stated on that site that you quoted.</p>
<p>Please find me the most recent CAS acceptance rate if you won’t take collegeboard’s.</p>
<p>Keep in mind that when it comes to ACADEMIC selectivity- you can’t just look at acceptance rates… you have to look at the quality of students who are accepted and the non-academic focus many universities place on college admissions…compare University of Chicago and Boston College. It’s undeniable that Chicago is more selective academically even though BC has the lower acceptance rate- many applicants who can get into BC fairly easily have no chance of being accepted to Chicago.</p>
<p>^You still haven’t answered my question: how do you determine academic quality?</p>
<p>Obviously by the strength of the school’s academic programs… in terms of math/science and humanities/social sciences. How good of an education does the school actually offer? Are college students, on the whole, satisfied with their education?</p>
<p>Okay, but is it your subjective opinion? How do you go about anwering your proposed questions?</p>
<p>I will admit this probably isn’t the best way but I used a few methods.
a.) Looked at ************** rankings
b.) Talked with people who actually were in college
c.) Observed which schools people were picking over others</p>
<p>I’ll reveal my rankings for the schools in terms of Academic Selectivity and Academic Quality.
Some universities were penalized if it seemed that they were too focused on holistic factors in college admissions and waitlisted/rejected people who were obviously more academically capable. Schools which accepted more applicants with low test scores/grades were penalized in my rankings.
This is how Wash U is so high in my rankings for academic selectivity (#6). Many of the ‘more prestigious’ schools have more unfair admissions policies to achieve other ‘student body goals’ besides obtaining the most academically competent class possible. Other schools have the opportunity to be more academically selective but they choose to not do so. </p>
<p>So here is how I rank them in terms of these two categories.</p>
<p>Academic Selectivity
Caltech
Harvard, Yale
Princeton
MIT
Wash U
Columbia
Northwestern
Stanford, Duke, Tufts
Penn, Chicago, Dartmouth, Brown
Rice
Emory, Notre Dame, Vanderbilt, Georgetown
Cornell, Johns Hopkins, Carnegie Mellon
Brandeis
USC
William & Mary, RPI
Wake Forest, NYU, Boston College, Georgia Tech, Lehigh
Rochester
UC-Berkeley, Michigan
UNC-Chapel Hill
UVA, Case Western, George Washington
Tulane, WPI
UCLA, Miami, Binghamton<br>
Wisconsin, Illinois, Maryland, Boston University, American, Stevens </p>
<p>Academic Quality
Harvard, Yale
Princeton, Caltech
MIT
Stanford, Dartmouth
Columbia, Duke
Penn, Chicago, Wash U, Brown, Rice
Northwestern
Notre Dame
Cornell, Johns Hopkins
Carnegie Mellon, Georgetown, Tufts
Vanderbilt
Emory, UC-Berkeley
USC, Brandeis<br>
William & Mary
UCLA, NYU, Boston College
UVA, Michigan, Georgia Tech, Rochester, RPI<br>
Wake Forest, Illinois, Case Western<br>
UNC-Chapel Hill
Lehigh
Wisconsin, George Washington, Maryland, WPI<br>
Tulane, Miami, Boston University<br>
American, Stevens
Binghamton </p>
<p>If anyone is curious about why certain schools (which you think might be deserving of Top 50) didn’t make the list using this criteria, I’ll gladly explain myself.</p>
<p>Anyone have anything else to say?
I thought people would find these rankings to be interesting…</p>
<p>I kinda sorta really agree with you.</p>
<p>WashU is much less selective than you have it. Its numbers are inflated by its heavy ise of scholarships and its acceptance rate is now much much higher than schools you have below it. Also Northwestern is way too high. Stanford, Brown, Dartmouth, and Penn lower than Northwestern and WashU??? Seriously? Brown and Dartmouth lower than tufts? HUH???</p>
<p>I agree. Wash U and Northwestern are ranked way too high on the academic selectivity list.</p>
<p>Agree as well. I think you have a few very out of place, particularly Tufts, Northwestern, WashU. Here’s my version.</p>
<p>Academic Selectivity
Harvard, Yale,
Princeton, Stanford
MIT
Caltech
Columbia, Dartmouth, Brown
Duke, Penn
Cornell, Northwestern,
Rice, Chicago, WashU, Hopkins
Emory, Notre Dame, Vanderbilt, Georgetown
Carnegie Mellon, UVA
Tufts, USC
William & Mary
Wake Forest, NYU, Boston College, Lehigh
UC-Berkeley, Michigan
UNC-Chapel Hill</p>